Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Birendra Chauhan @ Birendar Chauhan @ Virendra ChauhanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The bail petition is dismissed as no fresh ground exists, and the trial is ordered to be expedited within one month.

Summary

The petitioner, Birendra Chauhan, was charged under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for a murder case (Sessions Trial No. 483 of 2024). He had been in judicial custody since 13 December 2023 and previously applied for regular bail, which the Patna High Court rejected on 7 July 2025, citing the seriousness of the offence and specific allegations against him. The petitioner filed a fresh bail petition, arguing that he had been detained without cause, but the State opposed the relief. The Court observed that no new ground was raised to revisit the earlier bail order and therefore denied the bail application. It directed the lower court to expedite the trial and complete it within one month, allowing the petitioner to renew his bail plea if the trial is not concluded within that period.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the earlier rejection and absence of fresh grounds.
  • Whether the trial can be directed to be completed within a stipulated time frame.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • IPC 302
  • IPC 34
  • Criminal Procedure
  • high court
  • trial expeditious

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6115 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-527 Year-2023 Thana- ISLAMPUR District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Birendra Chauhan @ Birendar Chauhan @ Virendra Chauhan S/O Chhotu
                 Chauhan @ Chchotu Chauhan Resident of Village - Mojahirpur, P.S. -
                 Islampur, District - Nalanda
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Shyamal Prakash, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   30-01-2026               Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State.

                             2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions

                   Trial No. 483 of 2024, arising out of Islampur P.S. Case No. 527

                   of 2023, instituted for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the

                   Indian Penal Code.

                             3. Earlier vide order dated 07.07.2025 passed in Cr.

                   Misc. No. 7134 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was

                   rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of the

                   offence as also there being direct and specific allegation against

                   the petitioner, with a liberty to renew the prayer after six months

                   if the trial is not concluded.

                             4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 13.12.2023
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6115 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     without any rhymes or reason.

                              5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                     grant of bail.

                              6. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition

                     of the petitioner.

                             7. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the

                     petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to

                     expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously

                     preferably within a period of one months from today. If the trial

                     is not concluded within the period of one month, the petitioner

                     will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.